Re: Volunteering with LilyPond
I don't find the \overrides very hard to understand; it's one of the very first thing I knew how to achieve in LilyPond (Bertalan's plugin LilyPondTool helped me a lot to understand it, though). Well, actually it was what made me start implementing the plugin: I also wanted to understand \override :-) ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Volunteering with LilyPond
On 07.01.2008 (12:14), Bertalan Fodor (LilyPondTool) wrote: I don't find the \overrides very hard to understand; it's one of the very first thing I knew how to achieve in LilyPond (Bertalan's plugin LilyPondTool helped me a lot to understand it, though). Well, actually it was what made me start implementing the plugin: I also wanted to understand \override :-) \overrides in themselves are not so hard to understand, but in many cases, the scheme code that is needed in the construction seems more complicated than necessary for simple tasks -- it takes a lot of work, looking up things to get things right. Besides, once one draws in \set and \tweak along with \override, it's not so simple anymore... e -- Challenge: Time? Answer: A brilliant, many-faceted gem. Challenge: Time? Answer: A dark stone, reflecting no visible light. -- Fremen wisdom, from The Riddle Game ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Volunteering with LilyPond
2008/1/6, Graham Percival [EMAIL PROTECTED]: help ur program is broken. where are teh buttons 2 click on ahahahaha :) (irrepressible hysterical laugh) Still, if I might add a comment here, the quality we need the most is *not* a high LilyPond skill-level, but simply patience, enthusiasm, and preferably a taste for pedagogy. (Yes, Graham is kind of an exception :) One year ago, I was a *complete* newbie. I just wanted to give a hand. I proposed a few sponsoring offers that were all ignored, and at some point I realized this was not about money but about resources, man-hours. I realized the most useful and needed improvements were often very basic and immediate: -translating some documentation into my own language, -asking (and then answering) questions on the mailing list, -adding a few snippets to the LSR or reporting incorrect snippets, -reporting some bugs I came to find, -etc. During all this time, I never realized I was actually learning how to use LilyPond. And yet, it is the *best* way to progressively know what you're talking about. There are still many topics I absolutely don't know about. Everybody laughs at Graham everytime he says he doesn't know how to to do some simple tasks with LilyPond (e.g. adding lyrics), but I now realize that he is indeed a total ignoramus like myself :) This is what you are (unless you wrote the program yourself), this is what I am: just another absolutely unexperienced guy, who just happens to love LilyPond scores and have some time to spend on it. We will all happily welcome you, no matter your age, your (bad) English, your (absence of) former experience or your (lack of) skills. Cheers, Valentin ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Volunteering with LilyPond
Graham and fellow Lilyponders: I have been following the discussion of Graham's planned departure from the Lilypond team and other recent discussions on the extent to document code in style sheets and tweaks. I began using Lilypond in the summer of 2007, after rejecting demo versions of the major commercial notation software. It has been a rocky transition from pencil and paper to digital notation. The output from version 2.11.35 is quite good and much better than 2.10. I would like to contribute back to the Lilypond community which has been very helpful to me, but, unfortunately, I cannot *commit* at this time. This doesn't mean I cannot help, just that I cannot commit. (The truth is, my life is in shambles financially speaking --- no different than many other musicians?) No offense to everyone who has worked on the documentation for Lilypond, but the documentation is the weakest component of the package. The index often lacks entries for my questions. The entries more often than not, do not address my problems. The coded examples are often too clever and don't illuminate my ignorance. Obviously everyone wants to make the documentation equal to the programming. That is why the GDP is underway. Suggestion: Collect a team of Lilypond MUSIC Consultants. This could be the general lilypond-user group or a subset. Volunteer members would agree to answer questions. The GDP team should *not* spend time researching answers to musical or notational questions IF they can find a local Lilypond user who knows the answer. For instance, take the questions below: On Jan 6, 2008, at 2:58 AM, Graham Percival [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Concrete example? Well, there's falls and doits in Expressive marks. I have no clue what these are. Something for jazz singers? Saxophonists? Maybe they're used in Baroque notation? Or a special mark for accordion players? Is the current doc section acceptable? I have no clue. Judging from the picture and the input, \bendAfter does *something*. But I don't know what it's doing, nor what else the doc should say here. Maybe people who use \bendAfter would also want a link to the ancient notation articulations? Or the vocal aligning syllabels ? I have no clue. For example, f somebody writing the GDP had a question about falls or doits, he (Graham in this case) could simply post to the Lilypond Consultant list, What is a fall? What is a doit? And, a user responds: A fall is a downward glissando while decrescendoing from an initial pitch to an indeterminate pitch below. There are long falls (gliss down an octave) or short falls (gliss down a fourth). I primarily see them in jazz notation. A doit is an upward glissando of about a fifth from an initial pitch. The notes fade as the pitch rises. Falls and doits can be played (or faked) on most instruments not just saxophones. I've never seen a fall or doit notated in baroque notation (baroque notation is pretty lean). In a few months, if GDP is still progressing, we'll be tackling NR 2 specific notation. These problems will be even worse then. I honestly think that I've /never/ seen any classical guitar sheet music. How am I supposed to supervise work on this section? I can check submissions for accordance to the doc policy, but I certainly can't judge the *contents* of those docs. Now what about the poor GDP helper who gets assigned work on Guitar music? I don't think that any of the current helpers play guitar, so they'll have the same problems that I face. (nothing personal against guitars... I know virtually nothing about everything else in NR 2, including vocal music) Many of the volunteers begin their emails saying I know almost nothing about music notation, but I'm willing to help if you think I can without embarassing myself. I am completely baffled about all these volunteers -- I mean, I'm incredibly happy about them, but baffled nevertheless. Why do so many people want to help after reading nothing more than the lilypond tutorial? And conversely, why is it that nobody who actually *is* familiar with music notation and lilypond volunteers? Responding to Graham's public expression of ignorance, I will share my own: I am completely baffled by Lilypond code at least half the time. I don't understand Scheme. I don't get make-event. I don't understand when I code \once \override Score . RehearsalMark #'self-alignment-X = #-1 which should left justify the RehearsalMark to the time signature (I am leaving out other code here), the rehearsal mark is *not* left aligned. I finally shifted the rehearsal mark 7 spaces leftward until is was properly aligned. What I do know is various musical instruments, musical styles, and musical notation: piano pipe organ classical guitar saxophone clarinet viola accordion recorder trombone tuba voice familiar with Renaissance, Baroque, Classical, Early Romantic, Jazz (all styles), 20th century, and contemporary
Re: Volunteering with LilyPond
On 06.01.2008 (09:51), Reilly wrote:
No offense to everyone who has worked on the documentation for Lilypond, but
the documentation is the weakest component of the package. The index often
lacks entries for my questions. The entries more often than not, do not
address my problems. The coded examples are often too clever and don't
illuminate my ignorance. Obviously everyone wants to make the documentation
equal to the programming. That is why the GDP is underway.
Hopefully, the GDP will be able to remedy some of this. As one of the
rewriters of the Notation Reference (in fact the *only*, AKA Mr Zero), I
can subscribe to some of the criticism. I don't know about the index -- I
hardly ever use it, perhaps for the reasons you mention -- but as for the
examples, it has been my guiding principle that if I don't understand an
example, down to the details of why does this setting do that, why does it
have to follow this syntax?, it needs to be rewritten. I've tested all the
examples I've been through so far according to that principle.
To some extent, this runs counter to another documentation principle which
I've reluctantly, very reluctantly come to accept, if not endorse: since
all the music examples are updated automatically with convert-ly if syntax
changes etc. are introduced in Lilypond, the explaining text should not be
too directly tied to the examples, since it will then require quite a lot
of extra effort to go over all the text that is NOT automatically updated,
and this is a constant risk of error. I don't like it, but I see the
rationale.
Suggestion:
Collect a team of Lilypond MUSIC Consultants. This could be the general
lilypond-user group or a subset. Volunteer members would agree to answer
questions. The GDP team should *not* spend time researching answers to
musical or notational questions IF they can find a local Lilypond user who
knows the answer. For instance, take the questions below:
Re. your
What is a fall?
What is a doit?
example, the problem is not so much knowing what it means -- that can be
looked up quite easily -- but to know (a) what kind of variations does a
user expect? does size matter? angle? are different symbols or styles in
use, and are they informative variations, etc.; (b) figure out how to
effect all these variations through Lilypond code; (c) choose how much of
this is really needed in the docs, and how much of it can be written
meaningfully without violating the don't comment the examples directly
principle.
Your suggestion of a group of music consultants is fine, and I intend to
try to distribute some responsibility along similar lines when we come to
the Specialist notation chapters (so that Graham would not have to write
the guitar section), but I fear that such a group would tend to become too
loose (volunteers come and go), and it would probably be too much of a
hit-and-miss thing -- can I expect to have a sax player in the group when I
write about doits? Maybe, maybe not. It is probably more practical if
people write in with concrete suggestions if something is missing, wrong,
or unclear in their particular field of expertise.
A general *alert* to the GDP team: music notation is NOT standardized.
We know that...
I am conflicted in
regard to notation. I want to keep the flexibility of Lilypond to tweak the
output to my needs. Yet, I want to introduce some consistency in output to
improve the quality of printed music for all the composers who don't want to
tweak their output. I think minimally this would require a number of style
sheet packages (like LaTeX packages) which (a) address all the issues
appropriate for the intended output (e.g. contemporary conducting score
style sheet; contemporary study score style sheet; contemporary condensed
score style sheet); and (b) at the same time, make the issues user
tweakable.
Yes, and as Graham pointed out in another thread, this is perfectly doable
-- it just takes someone to do it. I'd love to be able to write
\rehearsalmarks{alphabetic} or \setlenght{betweensystemspace}{2em} if
someone writes a package that includes it.
Eyolf
--
`...we might as well start with where your hand is now.'
Arthur said, `So which way do I go?'
`Down,' said Fenchurch, `on this occasion.'
He moved his hand.
`Down,' she said, `is in fact the other way.'
`Oh yes.'
- Arthur trying to discover which part of Fenchurch is wrong.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Volunteering with LilyPond
2008/1/6, Eyolf Østrem [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hopefully, the GDP will be able to remedy some of this. As one of the
rewriters of the Notation Reference (in fact the *only*, AKA Mr Zero), I
can subscribe to some of the criticism. I don't know about the index -- I
hardly ever use it, perhaps for the reasons you mention
Jeremiah,a question comes suddenly to my mind: do you ever use the
LilyPond Snippet Repository?
(It's OK if you don't, it would just mean that it's not visible enough)
http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it
The LSR makes looking for tips extremely easy (Plus, we have a tagging
system that is gonna be accessible Real Soon Now, so things will be
made even easier).
Plus, it includes the whole LilyPond Documentation as well, and
searching for keywords is definitely much easier with this tool than
with the very limited index -- AFAIK only Graham has ever used it ;)
http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Manual
I'd love to be able to write
\rehearsalmarks{alphabetic} or \setlenght{betweensystemspace}{2em} if
someone writes a package that includes it.
What, you mean something like:
http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=368
:-)
Cheers,
Valentin
(PS. It's just a first try, which is why I haven't advertised it yet;
the whole code is commented out, as it is written for 2.11 and the LSR
is temporarily running 2.10)
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Volunteering with LilyPond
On 06.01.2008 (17:15), Valentin Villenave wrote:
2008/1/6, Eyolf Østrem [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I'd love to be able to write
\rehearsalmarks{alphabetic} or \setlenght{betweensystemspace}{2em} if
someone writes a package that includes it.
What, you mean something like:
http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=368
Something like it, yes. Great to see the example. But I also had something
more general in mind: a set of macros to avoid any direct fiddling with
scheme altogether, sth. like LaTeX in relation to plain TeX. I really,
really hate things like Staff.VerticalAxisGroup #'minimum-Y-extent = #'(-8
. 4), and it shouldn't be necessary to write something like that for
something as common as adjusting the vertical spacing. OK, if you want to
slant your stems by 5 degrees, then it would be nice to have the option,
but all the \once \override and #'(stencil bla bla) stuff should be made
much easier.
If someone cares to do it, that is...
eyolf
--
Besides, REAL computers have a rename() system call.:-)
-- Larry Wall in [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Volunteering with LilyPond
Greetings all:
On Jan 6, 2008, at 11:15 AM, Valentin Villenave wrote:
Hopefully, the GDP will be able to remedy some of this. As one of the
rewriters of the Notation Reference (in fact the *only*, AKA Mr
Zero), I
can subscribe to some of the criticism. I don't know about the index
-- I
hardly ever use it, perhaps for the reasons you mention
Everything about version 2.11 is much improved, including the rewriting
of the Notation Reference.
Jeremiah,a question comes suddenly to my mind: do you ever use the
LilyPond Snippet Repository?
(It's OK if you don't, it would just mean that it's not visible enough)
Yes, I do use the LSR. I also have found several private Lilypond
code libraries where users have been thoughtful enough to catalog their
solutions. I used Lilypond six months before posting my question to the
user's group because I feel it is my responsibility to make every
effort to use the published resources and not ask questions with
*obvious* answers. Now, I usually work several hours on a problem
before I post a question and at least half the time I find the solution
on my own. I enjoy the work and the effort makes me a better user. The
other half of the time, I do get stumped.
http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it
The LSR makes looking for tips extremely easy (Plus, we have a tagging
system that is gonna be accessible Real Soon Now, so things will be
made even easier).
Plus, it includes the whole LilyPond Documentation as well, and
searching for keywords is definitely much easier with this tool than
with the very limited index -- AFAIK only Graham has ever used it ;)
http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Manual
I respectfully suggest that usefulness of the LSR and the documentation
is impaired by the snippets themselves and not the search capabilities.
I don't have time to dig out an example now, but basically, I seach, I
find, and the snippet (or doc ref) does not answer my problem.
I'd love to be able to write
\rehearsalmarks{alphabetic} or \setlenght{betweensystemspace}{2em} if
someone writes a package that includes it.
What, you mean something like:
http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=368
cheerios,
Jeremiah
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Volunteering with LilyPond
On 06.01.2008 (14:21), Reilly wrote: Eyolf, On Jan 6, 2008, at 12:00 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Perhaps I misunderstand the purpose of Graham's example question. It's easy: the purpose of ALL of Graham's examples is that THIS TAKES RESOURCES and no matter how good the idea is, someone has to do it. :) It's annoying as hell, but he's right... In re your clarification re falls and doits above (a), yes, lots of variations, sometimes the length of the gliss indicates length of fall or doit. The fall/doit symbol is something like a musical font. I personally would not tweak this feature much, unless I hated the preset symbol. Thanks I think we disagree slightly on how my proposal would work (or, perhaps, how people behave). If I have to notate a classical guitar passage and I consult the Lilypond documentation and I find it inadequate, it is expecting a lot of my --- aka, the casual music engraver --- to rewrite the documentation and send it to somebody. (I don't even know to whom I would send it.) On the other hand, if I am a subscriber to a Lilypond Resource List and a specific question comes along to which I know the answer, I think I would be inclined to answer it. I do agree that from the documentation team's point of view it is more practical for volunteers to commit to rewrite sections of the manual. I was thinking more along the lines of: person A writes a lot of guitar scores, over the years (or months) he has aquired a good understanding of how the guitar-specific features of LP work, and he has also assembled a number of tweaks. He would be in a better position to rewrite those sections or come up with good/annoying questions than person B, who only writes polyrhytmic stuff for gamelan gongs. I was unclear about the somebody part. This list is a good candidate (although things tend to disappear in the bulk of messages here unless one has a good email client and working habits; I try to flag important messages, but I know I miss things); the docs meister is another -- once there is one again. ps: How would an English speaker pronounce your name? Eye-olph with the stress on the first syllable. Should be easy, but I have friends who still call me Eee-loph, even after almost a decade... Eyolf -- The Principal of Greenbow County Central Schools: Your momma sure does care 'bout your schoolin' son ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Volunteering with LilyPond
On Sun, 6 Jan 2008 17:15:34 +0100 Valentin Villenave [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Plus, it includes the whole LilyPond Documentation as well, and searching for keywords is definitely much easier with this tool than with the very limited index -- AFAIK only Graham has ever used it ;) No bloody way. I always look in the table of contents. Of course, I already have a pretty good idea of where everything is. And also, since I never use lilypond myself, I don't really look up anything in the docs these days. I think Mats uses the index occasionally. Cheers, - Graham ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Volunteering with LilyPond
On Sun, 6 Jan 2008 09:51:13 -0500 Reilly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: package. The index often lacks entries for my questions. This is, fortunately, the easiest thing to fix. In the docs, index entries are made in the relevant section. So for example, in the Ambitus section, we might have something like @cindex ambitus @cindex Showing the range of pitches Adding more entries is extremely easy, *if* we have specific suggestions. I'm willing to bet that I can add a new entry within 30 seconds of getting an email. ;) Want to play? Here's the rules: - send me an email with index in the subject. - the format is like this: SECTION TITLE INDEX TEXT 1 INDEX TEXT 2 ... for example: - Easy notation note heads Showing note names Printing note names Beginners, showing note names Instrument transpositions transposing moving music up or down printing music in different keys these index entries are getting silly but they illustrate the point --- You can add as many entries as you like for each section. The section names (ie the first piece of text in each paragraph) must be written correctly (copy and paste from the docs), because I'll be searching for that piece of text. As an experiment, please take 10 minutes (right now? :) to add some index terms. I suspect that this is an easy task that you could do whenever you have a few spare minutes. The entries more often than not, do not address my problems. The coded examples are often too clever and don't illuminate my ignorance. Obviously everyone wants to make the documentation equal to the programming. That is why the GDP is underway. This is a much harder problem to address. For now, please read NR 1.1 Pitches and see if there's any entries that don't address the issues. Collect a team of Lilypond MUSIC Consultants. This could be the general lilypond-user group or a subset. Volunteer members would agree to answer questions. The GDP team should *not* spend time researching answers to musical or notational questions IF they can find a local Lilypond user who knows the answer. For instance, take the questions below: We tried that a bit last Oct / Nov. There were very few responses. However, I've started a list of GDP Consultants; hopefully if people specifically put their name on this list, they'll look for GDP: blah blah emails and respond more. (I've already added your name) Responding to Graham's public expression of ignorance, I will share my own: I am completely baffled by Lilypond code at least half the time. I don't understand Scheme. I don't get make-event. I don't That kind of tweaking is much more advanced than the current problem -- I still need people who understand the basic lilypond stuff. That said, please consider the checking the LM job. You'll learn a lot more about lilypond (including such tweaks), and we need people to check it. Make sure you read the GDP version, *not* the 2.11 version. A general *alert* to the GDP team: music notation is NOT standardized. We are quite aware of this -- and in any case, this is a general lilypond issues, not a documentation issue. Fortunately, lilypnod is extremely flexible and can deal with these situations. Again, I recommend checking out the new LM, specifically LM 4 Tweaks. Cheers, - Graham ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Volunteering with LilyPond
On Sun, 6 Jan 2008 14:21:15 -0500 Reilly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Eyolf, On Jan 6, 2008, at 12:00 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: example, the problem is not so much knowing what it means -- that can be looked up quite easily It *can be*. But *I'm* not going to bother. Why should I? I don't know the instrument, I don't care about the instrument; if the users of that instrument can't be bothered to help, then I won't be bothered to write docs for them. A very real example of this: vocal music. Yes, most users of lilypond are vocal people. But I'm not. So I've never edited the Vocal music section -- despite the fact that it's the most-read section. How do we do divisi lyrics? How do we align syllabels to notes? I don't have a clue, and I don't care to have a clue. (at this point, nobody can seriously accuse me of being lazy or unhelpful, so I have no trouble being completely blunt about this) - but to know (a) what kind of variations does a user expect? does size matter? angle? are different symbols or styles in use, and are they informative variations, etc.; (b) figure out how to effect all these variations through Lilypond code; (c) choose how much of this is really needed in the docs, and how much of it can be written meaningfully without violating the don't comment the examples directly principle. These are also important... Perhaps I misunderstand the purpose of Graham's example question. The quality and useful of answers would depend on asking the RIGHT questions. ... but Reilly understood exactly my point. Here's an example -- the *only* example :) -- where I play the part of the helpful user. We'll pretend that Trevor Daniels (vocal guy) is editing the Orchestral string section. Trevor: What's this artificial harmonics garbage? Aren't all harmonics naturally occuring? Graham: It means you put two fingers on the string; the lower note is notated with a normal notehead, and the upper one is a harmonic. Trevor: cool. Like this? a cis\harmonic4 ? Graham: oops, sorry. No; it needs to be a fourth or a fifth. Like this a d\harmoinc2 bes ees\harmonic2 | a e\harmoinc2 bes fes\harmonic2 | Trevor: thanks, docs updated. (ideally I would have included the lilypond exapmle in my first reply, instead of waiting for another question from Trevor) If I didn't reply, Trevor *could* have found the answer. Maybe 15 minutes googling for the definition of artificial strings, maybe 10 minutes of figuring it out in lilypond... but as somebody who _knows_ orchestral strings, it only takes me 60 seconds to bash out a quick example. That saves Trevor almost half an hour of stumbling around in the dark -- all the while thinking this is stupid, a string player should be doing this stuff. Oh, and I could also point out Stravinksi's customary print the actual sounding pitch in a small black notehead above the two existing noteheads trick. Again, that's something that's trivial for a string player, but not at all obvious to a vocalist. In my experience, it is almost always more informative to ask someone who is an expert of sorts in the area I am confused. Exactly. I think we disagree slightly on how my proposal would work (or, perhaps, how people behave). If I have to notate a classical guitar passage and I consult the Lilypond documentation and I find it inadequate, it is expecting a lot of my --- aka, the casual music engraver --- to rewrite the documentation and send it to somebody. (I don't even know to whom I would send it.) After a bit of searching, you'd find http://lilypond.org/web/devel/participating/documentation-adding which directs you to either me or the -devel list. But yes, it *is* asking a lot. That's why we're doing GDP: a limited-time push to seek out anybody who could contribute (or simply be consulted), so that we can ask questions in advance. Cheers, - Graham ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Volunteering with LilyPond 2nd posting
The previous discussion got a bit off-topic, so to make this easier to see I'm posting it again. I've updated the list of open jobs and posted it online: http://web.uvic.ca/~gperciva/lilyjobs.html Cheers, - Graham ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Volunteering with LilyPond
Thanks to everybody who expressed an interest helping lilypond! I've discussed specifics with many of you, but I'm not certain that I managed to contact everybody. If your email slipped through the cracks, sorry, and please send it again! If at all possible I prefer to let volunteers choose their own jobs; please consult the list below. If you think you can do something, let me know! If you'd like to change your job or if I've written something down incorrectly, please let me know. I think the priority should be filling ongoing jobs, so those are listed first. Temporary stuff (ie GDP work) is at the bottom of this email. BUGS: all filled Bug Meister: Valentin Regtest checkers: Stan Sanderson, Garrett Fitzgerald, Alexander Deubelbeiss MAILIST SUPPORT: can always use more help :) LilyPond-user secretary: Calvin Mitcham, more??? % reply to simple queries, direct bug reports to the bug reporting % page and the bug mailist: % http://lilypond.org/web/devel/participating/bugs LSR adder: ??? % if there's some nice lilypond code, add it to LSR I know that a lot of people answer questions, but we need more people doing this. Many simple questions are being answered by project members; I *really* want those questions to be handled by other people so that the more advanced users can do more advanced tasks. Valentin is a perfect example of this: he's taking over my Bug Meister duties, so I'd rather not have him replying to help ur program is broken. where are teh buttons 2 click on or how do you draw ties (ie really simple RTFM questions). I'm hoping that by asking for official volunteers, we can get more people helping with these tasks. Grand Documentation Project http://web.uvic.ca/~gperciva/ Rewriters: ??? % people working on the actual content of the docs -- checking % that the docs are correct and complete, looking for mistakes in % the content, etc. % Some people who volunteered to do simple formatting jobs are now % working on rewriting as well (no, I haven't forgotten about % you!). But we currently have __NO__ helpers who are confident, % advanced, lilypond users. To put it bluntly, this sucks. Formatters: Alard, Jay, Ralph, more??? % edit the texinfo files for presentation (plus any content you % feel comfortable doing) % % this is easy for anybody who knows HTML or any programming % language. Headwords: Trevor Baca Music Glossary: Kurt Kroon Learning Manual: Trevor Daniels Checking the Learning Manual: Calvin Mitcham, more??? % This task is *ideal* for people who want to help, but aren't % very confident about their lilypond knowledge. Look at the GDP % docs, and read the new Learning Manual chapters 2, 3, and most % of chapter. Send any questions or remarks to lilypond-user or % to Trevor Daniels privately % % The Learning Manual is aimed at new users, so the less you know % about lilypond, the better for this task! :) % % Also, after doing this task, you'll have a much better idea of % what work needs doing in the rest of the manual. LSR adding / editing: ??? % we have about 30 hours of mundane web browsing / lilypond % snippet editing to do. Again, Valentin could do this, but I'd % rather have one person who can do this for him. % % Primary job: add certain snippets from the manual into LSR. % Secondary job: small editing of snippets. Like if a snippet % doesn't have any indentation, add the indentation. Cheers, - Graham ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
